Cory A Donovan1, Attiya P Harit1, Alice Chung1, Jean Bao1, Armando E Giuliano1, Farin Amersi2. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. farin.amersi@cshs.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for the treatment of breast cancer is becoming more accepted, technical aspects are still evolving. Data regarding risk factors contributing to complications after NSM are limited. This study evaluated technical aspects on outcomes of NSM. METHODS: Review of our database identified 201 patients who had NSM during the period from January 2012 to June 2015. We compared the effect of operative techniques on surgical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 351 NSM were performed in 201 patients. Mean patient age was 47 years. Inframammary (47 %) or periareolar (35 %) incisions were most frequent. Tumescence was used in 203 (58 %) NSM. Skin flaps were created using sharp dissection in 213 (61 %) and electrocautery in 138 (39 %) breasts. Nipple areola complex (NAC) necrosis was seen in 56 (16 %) breasts, of which 7 were severe (2 %). A higher rate of NAC complications was seen with periareolar incisions (p = 0.02). Sharp dissection did not result in significant rates of flap necrosis compared with electrocautery. Ten patients (3 %) had a positive anterior/deep margin, of which 7 (64 %) had an inframammary approach. Twenty-two (11 %) patients had an infection that required intravenous antibiotics. Fourteen (7 %) patients had implant loss. Dissection technique was not associated with implant loss (p = 1.0) or infection (p = 0.84). Forty-two (12 %) patients had radiation and seven (16 %) required implant removal. CONCLUSIONS: NSM has an acceptable complication rate. NAC necrosis requiring excision or implant loss is rare. Postmastectomy radiation is a significant risk factor for implant loss. Inframammary incisions have fewer ischemic complications but may result in tumor-involved margins.
BACKGROUND: While nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for the treatment of breast cancer is becoming more accepted, technical aspects are still evolving. Data regarding risk factors contributing to complications after NSM are limited. This study evaluated technical aspects on outcomes of NSM. METHODS: Review of our database identified 201 patients who had NSM during the period from January 2012 to June 2015. We compared the effect of operative techniques on surgical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 351 NSM were performed in 201 patients. Mean patient age was 47 years. Inframammary (47 %) or periareolar (35 %) incisions were most frequent. Tumescence was used in 203 (58 %) NSM. Skin flaps were created using sharp dissection in 213 (61 %) and electrocautery in 138 (39 %) breasts. Nipple areola complex (NAC) necrosis was seen in 56 (16 %) breasts, of which 7 were severe (2 %). A higher rate of NAC complications was seen with periareolar incisions (p = 0.02). Sharp dissection did not result in significant rates of flap necrosis compared with electrocautery. Ten patients (3 %) had a positive anterior/deep margin, of which 7 (64 %) had an inframammary approach. Twenty-two (11 %) patients had an infection that required intravenous antibiotics. Fourteen (7 %) patients had implant loss. Dissection technique was not associated with implant loss (p = 1.0) or infection (p = 0.84). Forty-two (12 %) patients had radiation and seven (16 %) required implant removal. CONCLUSIONS: NSM has an acceptable complication rate. NACnecrosis requiring excision or implant loss is rare. Postmastectomy radiation is a significant risk factor for implant loss. Inframammary incisions have fewer ischemic complications but may result in tumor-involved margins.
Authors: Laura S Dominici; Monica Morrow; Elizabeth Mittendorf; Jennifer Bellon; Tari A King Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 1.909
Authors: Zoran Radovanovic; Milan Ranisavljevic; Dragana Radovanovic; Ferenc Vicko; Tatjana Ivkovic-Kapicl; Nenad Solajic Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2018-06-20 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Olivia Quilichini; Julien Barrou; Marie Bannier; Sandrine Rua; Aurore Van Troy; Laura Sabiani; Eric Lambaudie; Monique Cohen; Gilles Houvenaeghel Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2020-12-31
Authors: Walter P Weber; Martin Haug; Christian Kurzeder; Vesna Bjelic-Radisic; Rupert Koller; Roland Reitsamer; Florian Fitzal; Jorge Biazus; Fabricio Brenelli; Cicero Urban; Régis Resende Paulinelli; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Jörg Heil; Jürgen Hoffmann; Zoltan Matrai; Giuseppe Catanuto; Viviana Galimberti; Oreste Gentilini; Mitchel Barry; Tal Hadar; Tanir M Allweis; Oded Olsha; Maria João Cardoso; Pedro F Gouveia; Isabel T Rubio; Jana de Boniface; Tor Svensjö; Susanne Bucher; Peter Dubsky; Jian Farhadi; Mathias K Fehr; Ilario Fulco; Ursula Ganz-Blättler; Andreas Günthert; Yves Harder; Nik Hauser; Elisabeth A Kappos; Michael Knauer; Julia Landin; Robert Mechera; Francesco Meani; Giacomo Montagna; Mathilde Ritter; Ramon Saccilotto; Fabienne D Schwab; Daniel Steffens; Christoph Tausch; Jasmin Zeindler; Savas D Soysal; Visnu Lohsiriwat; Tibor Kovacs; Anne Tansley; Lynda Wyld; Laszlo Romics; Mahmoud El-Tamer; Andrea L Pusic; Virgilio Sacchini; Michael Gnant Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 4.872